A
ativak
Member
1. under Basel III, are banks compelled to hold bail-in capital? If not, under what circumstances would a bank want to/need to raise bail-in capital? The answer to this question under the heading 'signalling' says: 'such bonds may signal internal concern on the part of the issuer, so indicate a low quality security' - what is the link between bail-in capital and internal concern?
2. high perceived risk due to uncertain term and yield due to risk of conversion/write-down - implies it has a high cost of capital -> is it more/less expensive to raise than tier 1 capital? And if more expensive, why does it rank below Tier 1 capital?
3. the answer has a section titled 'capital adequacy' - this section doesn't make any sense to me, especially the bit 'How does the bail-in bond count towards the insurer’s capital?' - if the insurer is investing in the bail-in bond, how could it count toward's the insurer's capital?
many thanks
2. high perceived risk due to uncertain term and yield due to risk of conversion/write-down - implies it has a high cost of capital -> is it more/less expensive to raise than tier 1 capital? And if more expensive, why does it rank below Tier 1 capital?
3. the answer has a section titled 'capital adequacy' - this section doesn't make any sense to me, especially the bit 'How does the bail-in bond count towards the insurer’s capital?' - if the insurer is investing in the bail-in bond, how could it count toward's the insurer's capital?
many thanks